MANY PARENTS today are shockingly ignorant when it comes to the mental world of children. This ignorance is the inevitable result of the prolonged infertility that came with the sexual revolution. During their twenties and early thirties, many adults hardly interact with anyone under the age of ten. A society that produces few children grows progressively more stupid and lacking in common sense. Individuals arrive at the threshold of parenthood unprepared for the fantasy world of children and their radical phases. It’s as if a Martian had landed in their midst.

Combine this ignorance with the left’s war against traditional sex roles and you get parents who, acting upon the advice of psychologists who have a vested interest in pathologizing every quirk of childhood, allow their young son to wear a dress to school. I haven’t read more than the first page of this New York Times article by Columbia Journalism School instructor Ruth Padawer and I don’t recommend you do more than that either. I offer it only to remind you yet again of how far, far, far we have fallen in this rabbit hole and of how you should do everything you possibly can to shield your own children and grandchildren from this sick culture.

—– Comments —–

N.W. writes:

Have you read the comments section after that article?! Dag gone, we’re in a tight spot! The people commenting are more confused than the reporter. Even the ones who try to act level-headed and logical are screwed up; absolute madness.

Laura writes:

The subject line of N.W.’s e-mail was:

LGBTQIPWHISKEYTANGOFOXTROT-OVER.

N.W. writes:

Here’s a gem, a perfect example of someone trying to be level-headed and morally responsible in a cultural maelstrom:

“I am against sexualizing children – I have no problem with boys dressing up in age appropriate girl clothing but putting little boys into sexy dresses with makeup and heels bothers me, just as it would at seeing a little girl dressed that way. How about more gender neutral clothing in general for children? I really do not like the hyper-feminine, princess stuff that my daughters are smothered with by the media and even in school. I do not want that for my son either if he is gender variant.”

- Mom Canada aug 8 th 3:43 pm

Ha, why don’t we all just follow Chairman Mao and wear one-piece androgynous coveralls, save a helluvalotta money on clothes and fabric and no gender issues to worry about, we’re all the same. Poor misguided fools. Figures she’s from Canadia, ha.

James P. writes:

Only American liberals – e.g., the writers and readers of NYT articles – are so stupid they have to ask the question “What’s So Bad About a Boy Who Wants to Wear a Dress?” as if it’s worthy of serious debate.

“Many of the parents who allow their children to occupy that “middle space” [between boy and girl] were socially liberal even before they had a pink boy…”

Nooooooooooo, you don’t say!

Hurricane Betsy writes:

I recommend that you do read the whole article. It would appear that these behaviours aren’t passing “quirks”. These kids, mostly boys, are seriously needing to dress like girls, though they consider themselves boys. The parents, most of them quoted in this story, don’t want to indulge these boys’ urges, but the youngsters become absolutely miserable. It seems to me that this is not like children who insist on having some sugary treat and if they don’t get it, they have a giant tantrum, but eventually, they learn to behave when they don’t get what they want. The illness these boys have is much, much more serious. Yes, some of the parents are making a virtue of necessity, but not all of them are. They are dealing with an impossible situation. Do read this article if you have the time. If it’s all accurate, and not just slanted by the author and the PC crowd, it’s rather horrifying.

My own opinion is that these behaviours, including homosexuality, are biologically based. The experts just haven’t studied this enough.

Laura writes:

Have you been living in a bubble for the past five years?

There have been scores of articles and television reports on boys trapped in girls’ bodies and girls trapped in boys’ bodies. They are everywhere. I saw one television news report about a girl hopelessly trapped in a boy’s body, so much so that her mother agreed to mutilating surgery and hormone treatment. She was the only child of a single mother, a mother who was distinctly masculine, and yet the journalist ignored the glaring environmental problems and made it seem as if there was no question she had some immutable, innate condition.

The effect of these pervasive stories is to exaggerate out of all proportion the very, very small number of children who suffer from serious fantasies of this kind. For children who experience intractable delusions, rather than passing fantasies or obsessions (and passing fantasies or obsessions in children can last for years), the answer is not for parents to cater to their delusions, just as the answer for a child who thinks he’s Superman is not to treat him seriously as if he is Superman, but to try to help him adapt to reality over the course of time. Worse comes to worse, a person may be forced to struggle with perverse longings for decades, just as people struggle with asthma or diabetes and yet somehow cope. There are worse fates in life.

A child wanting to dress like the opposite sex is hardly an “impossible situation.” Parents deal with much more difficult situations all the time. If the child has a brain tumor and there is no cure, that is an impossible situation. Not if he wants to wear a dress.

The purpose of these stories is to turn society into a mass sex change operation and make it all seem normal.

Mary writes:

Good heavens. Can we bring back the good old days wherein the liberal use of the social stigma held our society in check?

I haven’t read the whole article and don’t care to. Simply can’t bear it. But after skimming the first page it occurred to me that these parents are not aware that they are meant to shape their young children in important ways; they believe their children are born finished. They anxiously watch over them, looking for cues as to what kind of person the child already is and then they merely amplify what they find. They don’t correct bad impulses and strange inclinations; they don’t feel it’s their right as parents. They turn their children over to the experts. We are witnessing the last breath of parental confidence and authority.

My heartfelt sympathy for the parents of the very few children who actually have these types of problems.

Laura writes:

Imagine how profoundly disorienting it is to grow up with parents who have no confidence in themselves or who exert no authority. It’s like living in a house without walls. I think it drives children insane. And I mean truly insane.

Mary writes:

Laura wrote:

Many parents today are shockingly ignorant when it comes to the mental world of children. This ignorance is the inevitable result of the prolonged infertility that came with the sexual revolution. During their twenties and early thirties, many adults hardly interact with anyone under the age of ten.

Wow. This excellent point is probably at the root of the degrading of parental confidence/authority. Modern women have on average one or two siblings and they are born within a couple of years of each other. If those siblings and the woman’s friends all choose to delay childbearing a woman can have almost zero contact with children for one to two decades. It’s like starting from scratch.

Girls from larger families will often have siblings born when they are in their teens. If they marry by their mid-twenties the experience and wisdom and ease born of being around young children will flow uninterrupted into their marriages to the benefit of all. The young woman’s youngest siblings will enjoy contact with her babies, which will be the siblings’ nieces and nephews. Larger families benefit society in this way by creating tight bonds and easy relations between the generations.

In the extreme, delayed child-bearing could cause each new generation to be born a generation late. Hypothetically speaking, if most women work in their 20’s and 30’s and have one or two children in their early 40’s, in two generations grandparents will be in their 80’s when their first grandchildren are born, dissolving any overlap of experience; on the contrary, a serious offset of experience will occur that leads to what we are witnessing now, hindered parenting judgement and skills. Great grandparents will become a thing of the distant past.